PDA

View Full Version : Apple to Adopt Intel Ultra-Mobile Platform?




MacRumors
Dec 21, 2007, 11:45 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Appleinsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/12/21/exclusive_apple_to_adopt_intels_ultra_mobile_pc_platform.html) that Apple will be adopting Intel's upcoming "Menlow" Mobile Internet Device (MID) platform for multiple new devices in 2008.

Menlow incorporates a 45-nanometer low-power "Silverthorne" chip that promises to utilize only between half a watt to 2 watts of electrical power, making it ideal for future mobile phones and ultra-mobile PCs (UMPCs). Other features to be included in the platform include WiFi, 3G, and WiMAX technologies.

Menlow is expected to be delivered by Intel in the 1st half of 2008. Appleinsider is uncertain when Apple will announce products based on the new platform, but suggests that it is under consideration for next-generation iPhones or in the rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/26/the-return-of-the-newton-apple-pda/) Apple tablet/PDA.

DigiTimes had previously disclosed (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/03/intel-inside-future-iphone/) that Apple was looking into Intel's most advanced mobile system-on-a-chip, Moorestown. Intel claims Moorestown will be even more efficient than the Menlow platform, however it isn't due until 2009.

Ultra-mobile PCs were in the spotlight (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/03/09/microsofts-origami-announced/) in early 2006 when Microsoft revealed their Origami Project which introduced a line of UMPCs into the marketplace. The adoption of such mobile devices has so far been limited.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/21/apple-to-adopt-intel-ultra-mobile-platform/)



P-Worm
Dec 21, 2007, 11:47 AM
Sounds good. Faster speeds, longer battery life, smaller chips.

P-Worm

Eidorian
Dec 21, 2007, 11:48 AM
Intel is really pushing cheap, ultramobile recently. With 45nm it only looks better. :D

Rocketman
Dec 21, 2007, 11:49 AM
To me, this platform was the carrot at the end of a long 3 year stick that cinched the deal for Apple to cross over. The Wintel compatibility is a big factor, but Apple is, at its core, an all-in-one consumer device company.

Macintosh "platform"
iPhone "platform"

Rocketman

Supporting evidence from article:

"The importance of the new Silverthorne chip is only comparable with the 8088 processor or Pentium,” he told the German-language Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in a June interview. Otellini added that his firm plans to deploy a whole "product family" of 45 nm Silverthorne chips in the near future aimed at capturing the "top 10 to 20 percent of the cellphone market.”

dongmin
Dec 21, 2007, 11:54 AM
Curious about what kind of performance we'll get out of this. But the TDP is impressive.

Peace
Dec 21, 2007, 12:06 PM
how come no one is talking about WiMAX and intel?

Because Intel and Apple are not part of the WiMax allegiance.

JDOG_
Dec 21, 2007, 12:09 PM
To me, this platform was the carrot at the end of a long 3 year stick that cinched the deal for Apple to cross over. The Wintel compatibility is a big factor, but Apple is, at its core, an all-in-one consumer device company.

True, and if we can look back to the D5 Conference (http://d5.allthingsd.com/) earlier this year, I think Jobs made some comments on device specific platforms that alluded to such a thing joining the rest of the Apple product line.

Chaszmyr
Dec 21, 2007, 12:10 PM
Because Intel and Apple are not part of the WiMax allegiance.

Moreover, Apple's got an exclusive deal with AT&T, and AT&T has no plans to adopt WiMax.

Techguy172
Dec 21, 2007, 12:16 PM
Sounds promising but i wonder how speeds will be i mean after all it is an ultra Portable platform. the TDP looks very good.

SthrnCmfrtr
Dec 21, 2007, 12:16 PM
To me, this platform was the carrot at the end of a long 3 year stick that cinched the deal for Apple to cross over. The Wintel compatibility is a big factor, but Apple is, at its core, an all-in-one consumer device company.

Macintosh "platform"
iPhone "platform"

Rocketman

I remember a lot of people complaining when the announcement was made that Intel was a dinosaur and that AMD had destroyed them, and Apple was just going to have to switch again because Intel was going the way of Sun and SGI.

Amusing, how it looks a couple years later...

InkMaster
Dec 21, 2007, 12:30 PM
so would these chips fit into phones or just tiny laptops? Would be pretty interesting seeing something like this in the iPhone - especially if it makes Mobile Safari snappier ;)

Peace
Dec 21, 2007, 12:37 PM
so would these chips fit into phones or just tiny laptops? Would be pretty interesting seeing something like this in the iPhone - especially if it makes Mobile Safari snappier ;)


They would fit perfectly in a new revision of the iPhone.And the :apple:TV And any other small form factor device Apple can come up with.

tjcampbell
Dec 21, 2007, 12:40 PM
It will great to see how apple utilizes this tech.

twoodcc
Dec 21, 2007, 12:42 PM
looking forward to seeing what apple with do with these things.

mandoman
Dec 21, 2007, 12:46 PM
Check out this Intel prototype device based on this chip.
Now just Apple-ify it and put full blown osx on there and I'm sold!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/intel/int...vie-253558.php

gifford
Dec 21, 2007, 12:48 PM
Bring on the Apple '7 incher' !

FCPnewbie
Dec 21, 2007, 01:02 PM
Bring on the Apple '7 incher' !

and the iLube

walnuts
Dec 21, 2007, 01:02 PM
so would these chips fit into phones or just tiny laptops? Would be pretty interesting seeing something like this in the iPhone - especially if it makes Mobile Safari snappier ;)

That's the thing- how much more could processor speed help the iPhone platform? The limiting factor now seems to be download speed. Wifi + iPhone 's current processor seems plenty ample. The phone can play video, render web pages relatively quickly, produce cool visual effects (the back to home screen icon fall in, for example). All of this seems to suggest that the phone would percievably do everything we would want it to do (edit word processing or even presentation documents).. etc. Why would they update the iphone processor significantly and how would they market it? What next? Photoshop on the iphone?

I would guess then that this would be applied to either a tablet mac or an iphone that really does things that we can't imagine yet.

guzhogi
Dec 21, 2007, 01:21 PM
That's the thing- how much more could processor speed help the iPhone platform? The limiting factor now seems to be download speed. Wifi + iPhone 's current processor seems plenty ample. The phone can play video, render web pages relatively quickly, produce cool visual effects (the back to home screen icon fall in, for example). All of this seems to suggest that the phone would percievably do everything we would want it to do (edit word processing or even presentation documents).. etc. Why would they update the iphone processor significantly and how would they market it? What next? Photoshop on the iphone?

I would guess then that this would be applied to either a tablet mac or an iphone that really does things that we can't imagine yet.

A faster/more powerful processor will probably help if/when Apple supports more complex codecs. Like a 24/32/however many bit 192 KHz audio or whatever. But you're right; at the moment, internet speed needs to get faster first.

As for WiMAX, sounds cool. I know while Apple & ATT has a deal, that doesn't mean WiMAX can't get through w/ another provider. I'll admit, I'm not sure who provides WiMAX where, but it is possible.

ChrisA
Dec 21, 2007, 01:37 PM
...Why would they update the iphone processor significantly and how would they market it? What next? Photoshop on the iphone?

The current processor can drive the screen well but if the screen had four times as many pixes the processor would need to be four times faster. (Remember that if you double the screen size you have 4x as many pixels.)

What next? I don't know, Voice input? Natural language understanding? There are applications waiting that can suck up any amount of available computing power. For example wouldn't it be nice if you could simplely ask your phone using the blue tooth headset "any voice mail from John?" Much better then scrolling a screen and looking. Or just say "Ring if John calls, put the others straight to VM" and the phone would do it. The only reason we have a touch screen is because natural language understanding requires far more compute power than we have now even on the Mac Pro. Wait 20 years and it will be on a cell phone.

Rocketman
Dec 21, 2007, 01:42 PM
But you're right; at the moment, internet speed needs to get faster first.

As for WiMAX, sounds cool. I know while Apple & ATT has a deal, that doesn't mean WiMAX can't get through w/ another provider. I'll admit, I'm not sure who provides WiMAX where, but it is possible.

Sprint is deploying Wimax most quickly right now. Could AT&T buy Sprint?

I always felt and hoped Apple's enterprise division would be the "new telco" hardware provider for the AT&T high bandwidth protocol wireless rollout worldwide. Win-win, and rapid deployment indeed.

Then there is the new 700 mhz FCC sale in process.

Heck, AT&T and Apple could put a Wimax transceiver at every Starbucks and McDonalds and have really wide coverage overnight.

Rocketman

walnuts
Dec 21, 2007, 01:52 PM
The current processor can drive the screen well but if the screen had four times as many pixes the processor would need to be four times faster. (Remember that if you double the screen size you have 4x as many pixels.)

What next? I don't know, Voice input? Natural language understanding? There are applications waiting that can suck up any amount of available computing power. For example wouldn't it be nice if you could simplely ask your phone using the blue tooth headset "any voice mail from John?" Much better then scrolling a screen and looking. Or just say "Ring if John calls, put the others straight to VM" and the phone would do it. The only reason we have a touch screen is because natural language understanding requires far more compute power than we have now even on the Mac Pro. Wait 20 years and it will be on a cell phone.

Exactly- I was talking more near-term. Why introduce a more powerful processor now? I agree that someday in the future we'll have devices with true voice recognition or other things you've mentioned, but why update the processor now?

mrgreen4242
Dec 21, 2007, 02:04 PM
I remember a lot of people complaining when the announcement was made that Intel was a dinosaur and that AMD had destroyed them, and Apple was just going to have to switch again because Intel was going the way of Sun and SGI.

Amusing, how it looks a couple years later...

That was true up until the CoreDuo line was released, which was right around the time of the switch. I don't think anyone who knew what they were talking about was, at that point, contending that AMD was outpacing Intel.

Anyways, the idea of the UMP was cool about a year or two ago, but lately I've been less interested in the technology. Here's what made me look twice: the Asus eeepc (arguably the best of the UMPs, when you consider form factor, features, and price) vs. the touch/iPhone. The only thing the eeepc has on either handheld is a keyboard, expansion ports, and a bigger screen. The handhelds, tho, have superior battery life, a more innovative input mechanism, and most importantly portability.

I think my point is that rather than a 7" laptop or even a tablet, I'd rather see a 4" touch with an (obviously) larger, higher res screen and BT to connect it to a BT keyboard (and mouse if you wanted). A small, option docking station with some ports including USB, DVI, and audio out would certainly make it really interesting in my book.

Slightly larger/higher res multitouch screen, bigger battery, 16/32gb of flash, maybe more RAM than the touch, BT, a docking station to charge and connect a USB HDD and a cheap 17/19" LCD... charge $500 for the handheld (16gb version, +$150ish for the 32gb?), another $50 for the dock, a $100 for a decent sized USB HDD (320gb or so), $150 for a cheap LCD, $100 for a BT keyboard/mouse set and you're up to $900-1000 for a device that would serve as a laptop, desktop, PDA, and iPod. Not the most powerful thing in the world, but it would certainly be adequate for my wife, me at work (and most of my co-workers) and be really, really cool. Take (and access) all your files everywhere you go... anywho, just my end of the week ramblings.

rockosmodurnlif
Dec 21, 2007, 02:04 PM
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.

psychofreak
Dec 21, 2007, 02:07 PM
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.

MS credit for entering a market too early with bad implementation :rolleyes:

guzhogi
Dec 21, 2007, 02:08 PM
The current processor can drive the screen well but if the screen had four times as many pixes the processor would need to be four times faster. (Remember that if you double the screen size you have 4x as many pixels.)

What next? I don't know, Voice input? Natural language understanding? There are applications waiting that can suck up any amount of available computing power. For example wouldn't it be nice if you could simplely ask your phone using the blue tooth headset "any voice mail from John?" Much better then scrolling a screen and looking. Or just say "Ring if John calls, put the others straight to VM" and the phone would do it. The only reason we have a touch screen is because natural language understanding requires far more compute power than we have now even on the Mac Pro. Wait 20 years and it will be on a cell phone.

Sounds like the computer in Star Trek. Now if only we can invent transporters, replicators & holodecks!

DogcowUK
Dec 21, 2007, 02:20 PM
One thing that I wonder about: Apple has developed MacOS X "Lite" for the iPhone/iTouch running a Samsung ARM chip (correct??) Isn't switching to this platform going to give us the same situation as we have with PPC/Intel Macs i.e two MacOS X "Lite" platforms - ARM/Intel?

AidenShaw
Dec 21, 2007, 02:24 PM
They would fit perfectly in a new revision of the iPhone....

Menlow is still pretty big and power-hungry for a phone. Intel's already announced the follow-on to Menlow, though....


http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7167


Devices with batteries that last all day and offer 50% more performance than 2008 devices

Just recently, Intel introduced its 2007 ultra-mobile computing platform. At IDF Beijing, Intel then demonstrated its Menlow platform. Targeted for 2008, Menlow contains a new 64-bit processor with clock frequencies near 2 GHz , DDR2 memory running at 400MHz or 533MHz, solid-state NAND flash memory and discrete graphics processing.

The big kicker for Menlow is its substantial improvement in battery life over available UMPC offerings. Menlow has approximately twice the life of current devices, reaching up to 6 hours of regular use and 10.5 hours of standby.

Before Menlow devices make it to the mainstream, Intel this week announced another major milestone for its ultra-mobile platform. Called Moorestown, Intel revealed that by roughly mid 2009, we will be able to see devices that consume 20 times less power than devices available in 2006. According to Intel roadmaps, Moorestown devices will be able to last a full day's of mixed productivity and leisure activities -- approximately 24 hours.

What sets Moorestown apart from previous processors is the fact that it combines CPU, GPU and memory controller functions into one chip. Essentially, this is the same intention that AMD has with its Fusion program. AMD's Fusion also encompasses mobile devices as well as desktops. It is only a matter of time before we see the same idea from Intel in the desktop space being applied to devices such as thin clients and budget PCs.

Moorestown's CPU will be 50-percent smaller in size than Silverthorne and consume roughly 50-percent less power. Intel will also be making Moorestown available as a single core or dual core system utilizing DDR3 memory. Despite having internal graphics, Intel is expecting that Moorestown will outperform Menlow's graphics by 50-percent.

walnuts
Dec 21, 2007, 02:25 PM
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.

Is it really an apple vs. microsoft issue? Apple does hardware and the os. Microsoft does only the os. Was it the hardware makers or microsoft who pushed for the UMPC that exist already?

Besides, I don't think that anyone here is saying that apple is better than anyone else for having something, rather people are just excited that such a thing would be available with Mac OS X.

emotion
Dec 21, 2007, 02:45 PM
Moreover, Apple's got an exclusive deal with AT&T, and AT&T has no plans to adopt WiMax.

AT and who?

Like Apple cares about that relationship. It's very clear that if there was a better option (Google's 700MHz WiMax network anyone?) then Apple would go with that.

Let's face it most mobile phone companies really suck. They over promise and under deliver.

As for Intel not being interested in WiMax?

Why did they just declare 2008, the "year of wimax"?

http://www.edn.com/article/CA6513211.html

...and very publicly included the support for the standard in Menlow.

Big things in mobile computing are coming on several levels. This coming year will be interesting to watch (because of the above).

Not to mention Android implementations will be announced later on in 2008 (just in time for Moorestown in 2009).

lazyrighteye
Dec 21, 2007, 04:23 PM
To me, this platform was the carrot at the end of a long 3 year stick that cinched the deal for Apple to cross over. The Wintel compatibility is a big factor, but Apple is, at its core, an all-in-one consumer device company.

Macintosh "platform"
iPhone "platform"

Rocketman

Agreed.
While Wintel compatibility was certainly a driving force, ultra-mobile processing was what Apple was really interested in. The crux of the biscuit, as Frank might say.

I fully expect a UMPC in '08 and don't think it completely out of the question for this to be the device rumored for MWSF. Something like a hybrid iPhone/MacBook is what I'd like to see released. With Apple's focus on the Asian market, this device will have to exist sooner than later. Have to.

We'll see.

TurboSC
Dec 21, 2007, 04:43 PM
Sounds good. Faster speeds, longer battery life, smaller chips.

P-Worm

mmm I can't wait for the future... get here faster dammit. If I could freeze myself for a few years, I'd so do it... just in time for the next Apple device.. now that's the ultimate fanboy.

aswitcher
Dec 21, 2007, 05:37 PM
Are these chips reasonably (expected) priced?

Rocketman
Dec 21, 2007, 05:51 PM
Are these chips reasonably (expected) priced?

They are designed to go into $100 retail devices.

Rocketman

DMann
Dec 21, 2007, 06:00 PM
Sounds good. Faster speeds, longer battery life, smaller chips.

P-Worm

This destination on Intel's roadmap was one of the many incentives which convinced Apple to make the shift from IBM. Wi-Max and 3G, he we come!

winterspan
Dec 21, 2007, 06:54 PM
That was true up until the CoreDuo line was released, which was right around the time of the switch. I don't think anyone who knew what they were talking about was, at that point, contending that AMD was outpacing Intel.

Anyways, the idea of the UMP was cool about a year or two ago, but lately I've been less interested in the technology. Here's what made me look twice: the Asus eeepc (arguably the best of the UMPs, when you consider form factor, features, and price) vs. the touch/iPhone. The only thing the eeepc has on either handheld is a keyboard, expansion ports, and a bigger screen. The handhelds, tho, have superior battery life, a more innovative input mechanism, and most importantly portability.

I think my point is that rather than a 7" laptop or even a tablet, I'd rather see a 4" touch with an (obviously) larger, higher res screen and BT to connect it to a BT keyboard (and mouse if you wanted). A small, option docking station with some ports including USB, DVI, and audio out would certainly make it really interesting in my book.

Slightly larger/higher res multitouch screen, bigger battery, 16/32gb of flash, maybe more RAM than the touch, BT, a docking station to charge and connect a USB HDD and a cheap 17/19" LCD... charge $500 for the handheld (16gb version, +$150ish for the 32gb?), another $50 for the dock, a $100 for a decent sized USB HDD (320gb or so), $150 for a cheap LCD, $100 for a BT keyboard/mouse set and you're up to $900-1000 for a device that would serve as a laptop, desktop, PDA, and iPod. Not the most powerful thing in the world, but it would certainly be adequate for my wife, me at work (and most of my co-workers) and be really, really cool. Take (and access) all your files everywhere you go... anywho, just my end of the week ramblings.


I wouldn't call an "EEPC" or whatever it's name is a real UMPC. It's more of a gimmick to me. I'm not ridiculing it or it's owners, but to get to the price it sells at, they obviously had to use some low speed, low quality components.
A UMPC to me is just what the acronym stands for, an "Ultra-Mobile PC". AKA a small and powerful laptop/tablet with at least moderately high-end components, processor, RAM, Screen res, etc.

CWallace
Dec 22, 2007, 04:54 PM
One thing that I wonder about: Apple has developed MacOS X "Lite" for the iPhone/iTouch running a Samsung ARM chip (correct??) Isn't switching to this platform going to give us the same situation as we have with PPC/Intel Macs i.e two MacOS X "Lite" platforms - ARM/Intel?

More hopefully, is that it would allow Apple to use a common Intel-based operating system across their entire product line.

If OS 10.6 does indeed end-up as Intel-only on the Mac, it would likely be beneficial if it could also run on an Intel CPU in an iPhone, an iPod, an :apple:tv and any other computing/consumer device.

russell.h
Dec 22, 2007, 05:36 PM
I wouldn't call an "EEPC" or whatever it's name is a real UMPC. It's more of a gimmick to me. I'm not ridiculing it or it's owners, but to get to the price it sells at, they obviously had to use some low speed, low quality components.
A UMPC to me is just what the acronym stands for, an "Ultra-Mobile PC". AKA a small and powerful laptop/tablet with at least moderately high-end components, processor, RAM, Screen res, etc.

You may have a point regarding the definition of an "Ultra-Mobile PC", but as for the EEE PC I have used one and its really very fast. I remember when my desktop had a 166mhz processor, and it wasn't significantly slower than my macbook pro which has 2 cores each well over 10 times as fast as that single processor.

There is absolutely no reason to go putting desktop, or even high end laptop grade hardware into something that will be used primarily for browsing the web, typing documents, etc. I could do all of that just fine on my 166mhz processor, and one can do it all fine on an EEE PC.

That being said, I'm not buying an EEE until the second generation comes out. The current generation uses Celeron processors, whereas the second generation is supposed to Intel Core 2 type processors.

I don't think anyone imagines themselves using an ultra-mobile pc as a primary computing platform, so loading them down with expensive hardware seems pointless. The key is using optimized software. Take an iPhone, give it a little more "oomph" in the hardware category, give it a real, albeit small, keyboard and a larger screen (touch optional), then put on optimized versions of iWork, Safari, a media playing interface and release an SDK and Apple would have themselves a killer product. Especially if it came with integrated EDGE and/or 3G. I'm not sure voice would be necessary, I think most people would rather use a more-dedicated phone for that.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2007, 09:23 PM
Especially if it came with integrated EDGE and/or 3G.

In the ultra-mobile space, not having 3G would be a big problem.

My phones and laptops have 3G EV-DO builtin, why would a buy an "internet" device that used last generation technology?

AidenShaw
Dec 28, 2007, 10:45 PM
It'll be interesting to see if Apple will show up at CES and show that the real "ultra-portable" Mac is a new UMPC form factor....

Eidorian
Dec 28, 2007, 10:55 PM
It'll be interesting to see if Apple will show up at CES and show that the real "ultra-portable" Mac is a new UMPC form factor....I missed you..

Where'd you get the pictures from?

AidenShaw
Dec 28, 2007, 11:03 PM
I missed you..

Where'd you get the pictures from?

The Intel CES press kit at http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/events/ces2008/index.htm

Slides 23 and 24 of the "Presentation - Intel Pre-CES Update
product brief (PDF 3.7MB)".

Eidorian
Dec 28, 2007, 11:05 PM
The Intel CES press kit at http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/events/ces2008/index.htm

Slides 23 and 24 of the "Presentation - Intel Pre-CES Update
product brief (PDF 3.7MB)".I was expecting that.

Now to wait for CES and MacWorld :(

AidenShaw
Dec 28, 2007, 11:18 PM
I was expecting that.

Now to wait for CES and MacWorld :(

Maybe the Fake Steve Jobs could give us a link to the real Steve's Powerpoint slides for the keynote, since Otellini's deck is already available. :D

leehericks
Feb 4, 2008, 09:22 PM
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.

iPhone and iPod Touch aren't UMPCs, they are the next generation PDA. That is a point where everyone has been failing. PDAs were sliding out of favor. Convergence was necessary to add PDA features to phones and music players because the features are actually useful at times. And Surprise! The iPhone and iPod touch are popular. They run a version of a full OS, with innovative networking support and APIs. The SDK coming out soon is going to sweeten the deal (hopefully). People will stop hacking iPhone apps and officially make them, and this will be very promising.

So to get back to your thought on where credit is due...MS didn't make the first PDA, did they? They(MS) are doing something different than Apple and with limited success. Apple is converging PDA features with the gadgets that people use everyday.

diamond.g
Feb 5, 2008, 07:27 AM
Because Intel and Apple are not part of the WiMax allegiance.

Intel is. Here is the WiMax forum members list (http://www.wimaxforum.org/about/Current_Members/member_list/process/refresh?new_batch_size%3Aint=200&step%3Aint=1&batch_size=200&company_list_start=201). Here is Intels Page on WiMax (http://www.intel.com/technology/wimax/index.htm).

Gunga Din
Feb 6, 2008, 12:40 AM
So would all this be incorporated on the ipod touch? I was thinking of picking one up but i don't need it right away so I could easily wait for a revamp.

diamond.g
Feb 6, 2008, 07:08 AM
So would all this be incorporated on the ipod touch? I was thinking of picking one up but i don't need it right away so I could easily wait for a revamp.

It is possible, but no one except Apple and Intel can say when.

pilotError
Feb 6, 2008, 08:23 AM
Does anyone know when the AT&T - Apple exclusive relationship officially ends?

I could certainly see Apple doing 3G this year for the Asian market and WiMax the following year. Just in time for all those 2 year iPhone contracts to run out here in the USA.

diamond.g
Feb 6, 2008, 08:27 AM
Does anyone know when the AT&T - Apple exclusive relationship officially ends?

I could certainly see Apple doing 3G this year for the Asian market and WiMax the following year. Just in time for all those 2 year iPhone contracts to run out here in the USA.

From my understanding the relationship was for 5 years. So 2012 is the last year (unless there is some way Apple can get out of the agreement).